"At least kids are reading" is the lamest excuse for a "graphic novel"

I often bash comic books. Not the kind that are treasuries of sunday comics like the far side or garfield. Not even the kind that are written that way, like marvel and dc superhero comics (although I don't ever read them). But the kind that take a perfectly good, self respecting novel and destroy it by simplifying the entire story to fit inside speech bubbles.

I especially hate it when they manga-ize something that has nothing to do with Japan, Asia, or anything even remotely anime. They've done it to several books that I really like. The Bartimeaus trilogy. Artemis Fowl. Sherlock Holmes. The Scarlet Pimpernel. Everything by Jules Verne. Shakespeare. Shakespeare for crying out loud! Manga Shakespeare. It's an abomination.

I admit I'd never really read any of them, though. And lots of people excuse them by saying that their main redeeming quality is that "at least they get kids to read". So I decided to explore it a little, and see whether or not this so-called redeeming quality is actually a good excuse for ruining a perfectly good story.

Problem #1

I find the picture to word ratio really distracting. I'm having a very difficult time in examining all the pictures and thinking about what the words are saying at the same time. There's too much to look at and still remember the one or two sentences that I read. And I'm not someone who has trouble in reading or in multi-tasking. It seems to me like pictures are meant to enhance and not distract. People tell me that comics are good for helping kids understand the words because there are so many pictures. But I say, not if they split the attention of the kid instead of working together to produce a coherent whole.

Problem #2

Most of the novel to comic adaptations I've looked at have really crappy pictures anyway.

Problem #3

Reading comic book style is a whole different process than the book version. In a novel you have complete sentences, trains of though, lots of adjectives and descriptions, formatting, and (in good ones) samples of how other people really think and feel and see the world. These, to me, are part of the whole point of reading. To expand your world view, understand other people, learn things, think coherently, organize thought, and become better at communication.

Comics don't do that. There are little speech bubbles, and none of the words are things that people would actually say in real life. "Oh! No! It's looks like captain Evil is about to unleash his shrink ray on the innocent townsfolk!" It takes the (almost) same story and turns it simplistic and shallow. There's no possibility for critical thinking. For predicting, deciphering clues, or even suspense. The pictures give it all away before you can wonder what's gonna happen.

Admittedly, though, some things deserve comic book-dom. This twilight page perfectly illustrates how Bella and Edward's entire relationship is based on smelling each other.

There are probably other things too. But I don't feel like thinking about it any more.

Thus we see that teaching a child to read with a comic book basically defeats the point of reading in the first place. You don't have to use your imagination. You don't have to predict or wonder what's going to happen. You don't have to read sentences that are more than 5 words long. You don't have to become part of a realistic character.

Yeah, some comics might be fine. Maybe they have cool pictures that are fun to look at. Or maybe the original book was so bad that it doesn't matter. Or maybe it does occasionally make a kid want to go and read the real thing (although in my experience the chances of this are slim. Once they know the story, who needs to read it for real?)

But the excuse that "at least the kids are reading" is really pathetic. Because this is NOT real reading at all.